1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))
GHULAM ABBAS Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (CONSOLIDATION), SARGODHA
| Citation | 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Service Tribunal Punjab |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member |
| Parties | GHULAM ABBAS Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (CONSOLIDATION), SARGODHA |
| Primary Law | Civil service |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: Civil service as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Service Tribunal Punjab bench comprising: Muhammad Mehmud Aslam Pirzada, Chairman and Abdul Hamid Khan, Member.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 PLP (C (PLC(CS)) (GHULAM ABBAS Versus ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER (CONSOLIDATION), SARGODHA). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ikram Zahid for Appellant.
- Manzoor Hussain, D.A. for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 30th October, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
Adverse remarks, which according to instructions for writing of A.C.R. of civil servant were to be communicated to civil servant by Reporting Officer next month after reporting same, admittedly were communicated to him after two years period of report, thus remarks against him had lost their significance
Previous as well as subsequent service record of civil servant was unblemished and adverse remarks reported against him were without any base as nothing was on record to support remarks so recorded by Reporting Officer
During tenure of civil servant in office neither was any complaint against him nor any enquiry was ever initiated against him
Civil servant neither had absented himself from official duties nor he was ever marked absent in attendance register
Reporting Officer who had recorded adverse report in A.C.R. admittedly had given a good report to civil servant in following years
Adverse remarks recorded in A.C.R. of civil servant which otherwise had lost their significance due to violation of instructions laid down for its writing, were misconceived and unfounded-- Adverse remarks recorded in A.C.R. of civil servant were ordered to be expunged in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
and another Appeal No. 638 of 1989, decided on 6th November, 1990.
Adverse remarks, which according to instructions for writing of A.C.R. of civil servant were to be communicated to civil servant by Reporting Officer next month after reporting same, admittedly were communicated to him after two years period of report, thus remarks against him had lost their significance
Previous as well as subsequent service record of civil servant was unblemished and adverse remarks reported against him were without any base as nothing was on record to support remarks so recorded by Reporting Officer
During tenure of civil servant in office neither was any complaint against him nor any enquiry was ever initiated against him
Civil servant neither had absented himself from official duties nor he was ever marked absent in attendance register
Reporting Officer who had recorded adverse report in A.C.R. admittedly had given a good report to civil servant in following years
Adverse remarks recorded in A.C.R. of civil servant which otherwise had lost their significance due to violation of instructions laid down for its writing, were misconceived and unfounded-- Adverse remarks recorded in A.C.R. of civil servant were ordered to be expunged in circumstances. Ikram Zahid for Appellant. Manzoor Hussain, D.A. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 30th October, 1990.